--0-1022851391-1118096900=:67143
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


Hi,

I need monitoring all ODBC connections only.

For internal auditoring.



Regards,



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!? La mejor conexión a Internet y 2GB extra a tu correo por $100 al mes. http://net.yahoo.com.mx
--0-1022851391-1118096900=:67143
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<P>Hi,</P>
<P>I need monitoring all ODBC connections only.</P>
<P>For internal auditoring.</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>Regards,</P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p>
<hr size=1>
Do You Yahoo!?
La mejor conexión a Internet y <b>2GB</b> extra a tu correo por $100 al mes. <a href="http://net.yahoo.com.mx">http://net.yahoo.com.mx</a>

--0-1022851391-1118096900=:67143--
sending to informix-list

Cesae Cruz wrote:
> I need monitoring all ODBC connections only.
>
> For internal auditoring.

Dear Cesae,

I've seen this request from a variety of people for more or less the
same reason. However, I'm curious to understand why people think that
JDBC, OLEDB, .NET, and ESQL/C clients are less dangerous than ODBC and
therefore are not in need of monitoring. Why are ODBC connections so
much more deadly than, say, SQLCMD + ESQL/C - or even DB-Access?

If anybody else wants to chip in their $0.02 (or any other local
currency), then please do so.

There isn't a simple way to do it as things stand. The hard way
introduces I-Spy into the system - but that's rather like overkill. And
even it cannot wholly reliably determine whether a connection is ODBC or
something else.

--
Jonathan Leffler #include <disclaimer.h>
Email: jleffler@earthlink.net, jleffler@us.ibm.com
Guardian of DBD::Informix v2005.01 -- http://dbi.perl.org/